Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Magnum

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 17, 1995PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OLSZEWSKI, Judge:

The Commonwealth appeals and James Magnum cross-appeals a judgment of sentence imposed upon Magnum for committing the following crimes: burglary, 1 making terroristic threats, 2 criminal trespass, 3 possessing an instrument of crime, 4 unlawful restraint, 5 and simple assault. 6 The Commonwealth claims that the trial court, when imposing sentence, failed to take into account the mandatory deadly weapon enhancement. Magnum, in his cross-appeal, argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a verdict finding him guilty of burglary. The trial court found that the…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Feingold v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  2. Commonwealth v. HardcastleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Commonwealth v. TaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  4. Commonwealth v. McCullumSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  5. Commonwealth v. GordonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BraykovichSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  2. Commonwealth v. DiamondSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  3. Commonwealth v. PeerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  4. Commonwealth v. RaybuckSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  5. Commonwealth v. SolomonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API